EDITOR’S NOTE: The Star-Bulletin submitted several questions to presidential candidates Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Barack Obama, D-Ill. McCain’s replies were returned Aug. 15. The Obama campaign did not respond.
Question: Do you support using federal funds, currently estimated at $900 million, to subsidize a rail transit system for Oahu?
Answer: I believe the first step in any consideration of light rail or any other transportation system for the City and County of Honolulu is to let the people have a voice. Regardless of any federal funding, the people of Honolulu are going to face a significant tax burden for many years and will have to contend with major lifestyle changes. I believe in democracy and believe the people should have a say in how their tax dollars are spent.
Q: Proponents of the Akaka Bill see the measure as overdue federal recognition of the rights of native Hawaiians to form their own government. Opponents see it as a “Balkanization” of America. Please explain your views on the bill.
A: I recognize the importance of preserving both Hawaii’s indigenous culture and its unique island culture. Hawaii is the most diverse place on earth, and I honor the extraordinary blend of races and cultures that have made the state such a special place. The Akaka Bill would compromise that special blend of peoples and cultures by creating a race-based separate nation that would differentiate treatment for the inhabitants of Hawaii based on blood type. The Hawaiian government has never been a race-based government, as a kingdom, a constitutional monarchy, a republic or a territory. I believe it would be a violation of King Kamehameha’s principles that — “All men are of one blood” — to divide Hawaii and Hawaiian families along racial lines.
I believe the Akaka Bill would be bad for the economy of Hawaii, all the people of Hawaii and for indigenous Hawaiians. Dividing people by race inevitably leads to racial discrimination and conflict. I am committed to helping those of every race who need assistance, and deeply committed to federal programs that preserve Hawaiian culture and identity for the benefit of all.
Q: Would your administration pursue any significant changes to the military presence in Hawaii? Do you support or oppose basing a Stryker brigade in Hawaii?
A: Our military presence in Hawaii and PACOM (U.S. Pacific Command) plays a vital role in our strategic presence in the Pacific, and I will be open to a discussion on our current force structure in the region.
I have worked aggressively to reform the defense budgeting process to ensure that America enjoys the best military at the best cost. This includes reforming defense procurement to ensure the faithful and efficient expenditure of taxpayer dollars that are made available for defense acquisition. Too often, parochial interests — rather than the national interest — have guided our spending decisions. I support significant reform in our defense acquisition process to ensure that dollars spent actually contribute to U.S. security.
While spending reform is necessary, I have been a tireless advocate of our military and ensuring that our forces are properly postured, funded and ready to meet the nation’s obligations both at home and abroad. I have fought to modernize our forces, to ensure that America maintains and expands its technological edge against any potential adversary, and to see that our forces are capable and ready to undertake the variety of missions necessary to meet national security objectives.
Q: The high price of oil is threatening Hawaii’s No. 1 industry, tourism. As president, what would you do to help lessen the immediate economic threat of higher fuel prices?
A: Our nation’s future security and prosperity depends on the next president making the hard choices that will break our nation’s strategic dependence on foreign sources of energy and will ensure our economic prosperity by meeting tomorrow’s demands for a clean portfolio. I have made the necessary choices — producing more power, pushing technology to help free our transportation sector from its use of foreign oil, cleaning up our air and addressing climate change, and ensuring that Americans have dependable energy sources. I will lead the effort to develop advanced transportation technologies and alternative fuels to promote energy independence and cut off the flow of oil wealth to repressive dictatorships like Iran.
There is no easier or more direct way to prove to the world that we will no longer be subject to the whims of others than to expand our production capabilities. I will commit to expand domestic oil exploration and promote the use of our vast national supplies of natural gas. We have trillions of dollars’ worth of oil and gas reserves in the U.S. at a time we are exporting hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas to buy energy.
Q: Public schools in Hawaii have struggled with complying with the requirements of the No Child Left Behind law. What changes, if any, would your administration make to the law?
A: There should be an emphasis on standards and accountability. However, our goal cannot be group averages. Instead, our focus should be to inspire every child to strive to reach his or her potential. While NCLB has been invaluable in providing a clear picture of which schools and students are struggling, it is only the beginning of education reform.
I will devote five percent of Title II funding to states to recruit teachers who graduate in the top 25 percent of their class or who participate in an alternative teacher recruitment program such as Teach for America, the New York City Teaching Fellowship Program, the New Teacher Project, the American Board for Teacher Excellence, or excellent university initiatives.
I will devote 60 percent of Title II funding for incentive bonuses for high performing teachers to locate in the most challenging educational settings, for teachers to teach subjects like math and science, and for teachers who demonstrate student improvement. Payments will be made directly to teachers. Funds should also be devoted to provide performance bonuses to teachers who raise student achievement and enhance the school-wide learning environment. Principals may also consider other issues in addition to test scores such as peer evaluations, student subgroup improvements, or being removed from the state’s “in need of improvement” list.
Where federal funds are involved, teacher development money should be used to enhance the ability of teachers to perform in today’s technology driven environment. We need to provide teachers with high quality professional development opportunities with a primary focus on instructional strategies that address the academic needs of their students. The first 35 percent of Title II funding would be directed to the school level so principals and teachers could focus these resources on the specific needs of their schools.
Q: What are your plans to improve health care and health care facilities for veterans?
A: We have a sacred compact with our wounded veterans to provide for their recovery when they return from the battlefield. We must fully fund the Veterans Affairs health care budget in a timely and predictable manner. Those who have risked their lives in service to their fellow citizens deserve nothing less than the best medical care in the world.
When the VA cannot meet our veterans’ needs, our veterans must be given alternative means of access to health care and freedom of choice. Too many veterans are unable to obtain health care through the VA because of geographical constraints, unreasonably long waiting lists, or the lack of specialized facilities at local VA hospitals. I will develop and enforce demanding new standards for veterans’ access to health care for injuries or illness related to military service: no more than an hour’s drive for care, routine care within a week, urgent care within 24 hours, and specialty care within a month.
I have proposed a Veterans’ Care Access Card, which would expand access and choice for those veterans with illness or injury incurred during military service, as well as low-income veterans. This supplement to ordinary VA care — which would not replace or privatize existing programs — would permit those veterans unable to obtain timely and appropriate VA care under the standards set out above, to receive care at a private facility.
